Implementation of Remote Activity Sensing to Support a Rehabilitation Aftercare Program: Observational Mixed Methods Study With Patients and Health Care Professionals
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Physical activity is central to maintaining the quality of life for patients with complex chronic conditions and is thus at the core of neurorehabilitation. However, maintaining activity improvements in daily life is challenging. The novel Stay With It program aims to promote physical activity after neurorehabilitation by cultivating self-monitoring skills and habits. OBJECTIVE: We examined the implementation of the Stay With It program at the Valens Rehabilitation Centre in Switzerland using the normalization process theory framework, focusing on 3 research aims. We aimed to examine the challenges and facilitators of program implementation from the perspectives of patients and health care professionals. We aimed to evaluate the potential of activity sensors to support program implementation and patient acceptance. Finally, we aimed to evaluate patients' engagement in physical activity after rehabilitation, patients' self-reported achievement of home activity goals, and factors influencing physical activity. METHODS: Patients were enrolled if they had a disease that was either chronic or at risk for chronicity and participated in the Stay With It program. Patients were assessed at baseline, the end of rehabilitation, and a 3-month follow-up. The health care professionals designated to deliver the program were surveyed before and after program implementation. We used a mixed methods approach combining standardized questionnaires, activity-sensing data (patients only), and free-text questions. RESULTS: This study included 23 patients and 13 health care professionals. The diverse needs of patients and organizational hurdles were major challenges to program implementation. Patients' intrinsic motivation and health care professionals' commitment to refining the program emerged as key facilitators. Both groups recognized the value of activity sensors in supporting program implementation and sustainability. Although patients appreciated the sensor's ability to monitor, motivate, and quantify activity, health care professionals saw the sensor as a motivational tool but expressed concerns about technical difficulties and potential inaccuracies. Physical activity levels after patients returned home varied considerably, both within and between individuals. The self-reported achievement of activity goals at home also varied, in part because of vague definitions. Common barriers to maintaining activity at home were declining health and fatigue often resulting from heat and pain. At the 3-month follow-up, 35% (8/23) of the patients withdrew from the study, with most citing deteriorating physical health as the reason and that monitoring and discussing their low activity would negatively affect their mental health. CONCLUSIONS: Integrating aftercare programs like Stay With It into routine care is vital for maintaining physical activity postrehabilitation. Although activity trackers show promise in promoting motivation through monitoring, they may lead to frustration during health declines. Their acceptability may also be influenced by an individual's health status, habits, and technical skills. Our study highlights the importance of considering health care professionals' perspectives when integrating new interventions into routine care.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».